fantasai wrote:
>
> Alex Mogilevsky wrote:
>> We've built a case with several variations of overflow scroll/auto
>> with content
>> that fits and that doesn't.
>>
>> A case that doesn't have broad interop is case #2 (#5 and #7 are
>> variations
>> testing the same effect). We believe everything should fit in these
>> cases and
>> scrollbars should be inactive. That is FireFox 3 Beta 2 behavior, we
>> believe
>> it is the most functional. We would like to see an update in the spec
>> that
>> matches that behavior.
>
> Thanks Alex, these are excellent. I agree that FF3b2's behavior seems
> the most functional.
>
Case #3 raises the question: what exactly is content box of an element?
Case #3 shall not show any scrollbars.
If it shows scrollbars then rendering of this case:
<!doctype>
<html>
<head>
<style>
p { font: 14pt sans-serif; border:1px solid; }
</style>
</head>
<body>
<p style="width: 100px; height:100px; background: lightgreen;">some
content that does not fit into a container so it will overflow</p>
<p style="width: 100px; height:100px; background: orange;">some
content that does not fit into a container so it will overflow</p>
</body>
</html>
must not have text of the paragraphs rendered on top of each other -
paragraphs here should have computed height equal to the height of
content, like here:
<table>
<tr>
<td style="width: 100px; height:100px; background:
lightgreen;">some content that does not fit into a container so it will
overflow</td>
</tr><tr>
<td style="width: 100px; height:100px; background: orange;">some
content that does not fit into a container so it will overflow</td>
</tr>
</table>
This sample, btw, demonstrates another issue:
It appears as cells in table use overflow:never value (that does not
exist in CSS at all).
This and layout algorithm that use flexes (a.k.a. shrink-to-fit) makes
tables "unbeatable-by-css" so far.
--
Andrew Fedoniouk.
http://terrainformatica.com